To the reconstruction of the philosophical discourse of tolerance: European and Ukrainian contexts
PDF (Українська)


tolerance, justice, recognition, identity, moral norms, experience, existence

Abstract views: 57
PDF Downloads: 62

How to Cite

Usov, D. (2020). To the reconstruction of the philosophical discourse of tolerance: European and Ukrainian contexts. Multiversum. Philosophical Almanac, 2(1), 29-43.


Practical and theoretical reasons became the cause of the chosen theme’s relevance. Firstly it goes about the importance of a coherent historical and philosophical understanding of tolerance as a civic feature and an essential characteristic of human existence in terms of formation of domestic civil society. And secondly it goes about the attempt to single out the most important models of conceptualization of the idea of tolerance in contemporary philosophical thought as the realization of the impossibility of tolerant, just and humane resolution of social and intercultural conflicts without decent mutual respect, identification of their participants’ dignity. Determination of horizontal-personal and vertical-institutional measurements of tolerance, as well as its moral-ethical and philosophical-anthropological components carried out on the based of gradual reconstruction of the works of leading western, mostly European as well as Ukrainian philosophers, which helps to understand the prospects for further study of tolerance in the context of recognition, freedom, justice, trust and compassion. It also goes about the importance and exuberance of realizations of tolerance as the main value of a free democratic society: in the context of “deliberative democracy” (Habermas), unity, integrity of moral norms and personal experience (Popovich), people's rights to resistance (Rowls), and the development of a "critical theory of tolerance" (Forst, Höffe). On the bases of conducted in the article research, the author concludes about the following important features of the modern existence of tolerance: its transformation from personal to institutional-legal, interethnic embodiment; the vital need to supplement its legal dimensions with a moral realm, when to be intolerant of another, special being gradually becomes not just illegal, but immoral.
PDF (Українська)


Osborne, Thomas. (2020). Civil Society, Populism and Liberalism. Retrieved from:

Toleranz: Philosophische Grundlagen und gesellschaftliche Praxis einer umstrittenen Tugend. (2000). Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag. 285 s. [In German].

Habermas, J. (2013). When must we be tolerant? On competition of world views, values and theoreies. Tolerance and dialogue in the modern world. Ky-iv, 5-19. [In Russian].

Forst, Rainer. (2003). Toleranz im Konflikt. Geschichte, Gehalt und Gegenwart eines umstrittenen Begriffs. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. 816 s. [In German].

Locke, John. (2001). Two Treatises on Governance. Kyiv: Osnovy, 265. [In Ukrainian].

Waltzer, Michael. (2003). On Toleration. Kharkiv: RA-Caravela Publishing Group, 148. [In Ukrainian].

Waltzer, Michael. (2007). Thinking Politically. Essays in Political Theory. New Haven: Yale University Press, 368.

Žižek, Slavoj. (2009). Violence. Six Sideway Reflections. London: Profile books, 224.

Ricœur, Paul. (1995). Tolerance, intolerance, intolerable. Around Politics. Kyiv: Dukh i litera, 313-332. [In Ukrainian].

Raz, Joseph. (2001). The morality of freedom. Kyiv: Veselka Publishing, 430. [In Ukrainian].

Kovadlo, G. (2014). Spirituality and morality: anthropocultural dimensions of the philosophy of morality. Kyiv, 332. [In Ukrainian].

Höffe, Otfried. (2007). Democracy in the era of globalization. Kyiv: PPS-2002 Publishing, 436. [In Ukrainian].

Höffe, Otfried. (2015). Kritik der Freiheit: Das Grundproblem der Moderne. München: C.H.Beck. 398 s. [In German].

Popovich, M. (2011). To be a man. Kyiv: Kyevo-Mohylyansʹka akademiya, 223. [In Ukrainian].

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Download data is not yet available.